-----Original Message----- >From: fantasai >Sent: Monday, June 06, 2011 2:08 AM >To: www-style@w3.org >Subject: Re: [css3-flexbox] getting multiline flexbox back into the spec > >On 06/06/2011 03:03 PM, Andrew Fedoniouk wrote: >> >> ? What exactly will be rendered in this case: >> >> .flex-container { >> flex-orientation: rows; >> flex-wrap: no-wrap; /* wrapping what actually? */ >> direction: rtl; >> flex-direction: backward; >> } >> .flex-container > * { width:50%; } >> >> with this markup: >> >> <div .flex-container> >> <p>1</p> >> <p>2</p> >> <p>3</p> >> <p>4</p> >> </div> > >You will get four boxes in a row from left to right. Is this is because of backward(rtl) === ltr ? Why do we need 'flex-direction' at all? > >1 2 3 4 > >The width of those boxes would be determined by the >flexbox spec, I'm not sure what it says for four >boxes of 50% each in a row. > As far as I understand all this can be reduced to single property: flex-orientation: rows | columns | horizontal | vertical or to two: flex-orientation: horizontal | vertical flex-wrap: no-wrap | wrap or to single one again: flow: horizontal[(wrap|balanced)] | vertical[(wrap|balanced)] | ... In any case, in your definition there is an overhead as 'rows' is a synonym of 'horizontal & wrap' and 'cols' - 'vertical & wrap'. Or I just didn't get the idea. -- Andrew Fedoniouk http://terrainformatica.comReceived on Monday, 6 June 2011 16:35:02 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:41 GMT